The Rise of the Internet in Establishment Politics

Changed:

<<

In the 2010 midterm elections, the Democratic Party suffered historic loses, losing 63 seats in the House. The defeat was fueled primarily by depressed turnout among Democratic base groups—the so-called “Obama coalition”—costing the Democrats dearly at the polls.

>>

In the 2010 midterm elections, the Democratic Party suffered historic loses, losing 63 seats in the House. The defeat was fueled primarily by depressed turnout among Democratic base groups—the so-called “Obama coalition”—costing the Democrats dearly at the polls.

Paradoxically, 2010’s disastrous results turned out to be blessing for the Democrats. Chastened by the shellacking, the 2012 Obama campaign launched its preparations with a sort of vicious ferocity. In particular, the revamped Obama campaign intensely focused their efforts on quietly amassing a colossal database that would serve to be its ace in the hole. That is, even if national polls disfavored the President, the campaign was ready to micro-target specific, high-value (i.e. left-leaning independent) voters living in swing states and still win the election. As a result, they created the single-greatest digital database and micro-targeting operation in political history.

Line: 16 to 16

How the Pervasiveness of Social Media Changes Everything

Changed:

<<

In 2000, Robert Putnam discussed the decline of traditional social networks and civic engagement in Bowling Alone. In Bowling Alone, Putnam blamed technology for “individualizing” Americans by encouraging them to spend their time watching television instead of becoming engaged in their communities. And Putnam was partially correct—in today’s age, the town square, village green, and union hall are no longer primary settings for discussing political issues.

>>

In 2000, Robert Putnam discussed the decline of traditional social networks and civic engagement in Bowling Alone. In Bowling Alone, Putnam blamed technology for “individualizing” Americans by encouraging them to spend their time watching television instead of becoming engaged in their communities. And Putnam was partially correct—in today’s age, the town square, village green, and union hall are no longer primary settings for discussing political issues.

Social media, however, has filled much of that void by allowing people to develop social ties virtually. Today, citizens are more likely to talk about political issues online than at their local church.

Changed:

<<

The crucial difference, of course, is that all social media activity is being recorded, analyzed, and commoditized.

But while it may seem relatively benign for a commercial retailer to leverage this platform to increase diaper sales, serious questions arise when considering the implications of merging social media data mining with the democratic process.

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.